NOPNAV20180685_LSJ_-_Framework_Analysis_-_Signed.PDF

C C

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

NAVSUP FLEET LOGISTICS CENTER NORFOLK -

700 ROBBINS AyE, BLDG 2B

PHILADELPHIA, PA 19111-5083

FL REPLY REFER TO

28 March 2018 260.3J

LSJ# 18-028

LIMITED SOURCE JUSTIFICATION FOR MAC ORDER (above SAT)

1. IDENTIFICATION OF AGENCY AND CONTRACTING ACTIVITY: This is a Justification for an Exception to Fair Opportunity. The requiring activity is Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV N8 1 and N91); the contracting activity is the Fleet Logistics Center Norfolk, Contracting Department Philadelphia Office.

2. NATURE/DESCRIPTION OF CONTRACT ACTION: This acquisition is conducted under the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2304a through 2304d. This is a limited source action to be awarded as a new task order to the large business identified in paragraph 3 below. The placement of a Cost Plus Fixed Fee order is anticipated.

3. DESCRIPTION OF REQUIRED SUPPLIES/SERVICES: The proposed acquisition will cover analytic work and expansion and adaptation of existing contractor managed models in support of Navy program decisions that integrate and balance future force structure, capabilities, and readiness plans to enhance and integrate a framework model that guides and aligns force planning and establish seamless transitions between the legacy force and the future force to ensure the Navy remains relevant, affordable, and adaptable. The contractor will leverage extensive modeling expertise, experience with existing future force structure models and analytic efforts, substantial experience with recent POM cycle issues and requirements generation at both the capability and platform level to perform analytic work and enhance and integrate existing models. The support will include the adaptation of a model framework developed for OPNAV N91 to evaluate Navy shipbuilding to support analysis of aircraft and weapons capabilities, the adaptation of the existing N97 USW Force Analysis System (UFAS) for other warfare capability analysis, and the ability to leverage contractor expertise with the FASTCOST model.

The intended period of performance for this requirement is from I May 2018 through 28 February 2019. The IGE for the required services is approximately $414,900.00 and 3040 hours of professional support. The contractor identified to support this requirement is SPA, Inc. under the awarded N8 I World Class Models MAC contract NOOl 89- l4-D-Z007.

4. IDENTIFICATION OF THE JUSTIFICATION RATIONALE AND/OR DEMONSTRATION OF

CONTRACTOR’S UNIQUE QUALIFICATIONS: The statutory authority which permits not providing each awardee a fair opportunity to be considered for each order exceeding $3,500 issued under a multiple award contract islO U.S.C. 2304c, as implemented by FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B), CL(B) Only one awardee is capable of providing the supplies or services required at the level of quality required because the supplies or services ordered are unique or highly specialized.”

This instant requirement leverages analysis and modeling performed by SPA as follows:

a. Associated Fleet Architecture cost modeling (FASTCOST) was developed under contract # N00178-05-D- 4592-FKO1 awarded to SPA Inc. This contract has since expired and is no longer available for additional tasking.

b. FASTCOST is now being updated and maintained via contract #N00178-04-D-4034-EXO3, which was awarded to Delta Resources, but Delta Resources did not have the technical qualifications to update and maintain the FASTCOST model; Delta conducted a Technical Evaluation to award this work to SPA, Inc.

The Delta contract is Firm Fixed Price and the ceiling would need to be raised to add work to this contract.

c. The undersea portion of Fleet Architecture framework, the Undersea Force Analysis System (UFAS), was developed under the Navy, Director of Strategic Systems Programs (SSP) Office contract # N00030-16-C- 0019 awarded sole source to SPA, Inc. based on their technical expertise and experience. The intent is now

C to build upon this undersea framework and work with Navy resource sponsors to expand it beyond undersea into surface, aviation, and the range of platforms, weapons, sensors, networks across the Navy.

This expansion is beyond the scope of the SSP contract which only covers undersea, so this vehicle is not a feasible option to use to award this work to SPA.

d. Part of the UFAS expansion was done under contract # N00189-16-D-Z034 awarded to SYNCHRON, as part of Program Objectives Memorandum (POM) support. SYNCFIRON subcontracted with SPA to expand the UFAS architecture and populate an integrated shipbuilding framework to support the “Navy the Nation Needs” force architecture and 30-year ship and aviation plans submitted as part of POM-19. As a small business contract, however, SPA cannot perform additional work under this contract due to the work-share requirements of the contract, and SYNCHRON does not have the expertise to perform this work.

(a) Describe in detail reason for purchasing and win, it is beneficial to the Navy

This instant requirement is to expand the shipbuilding framework and integrate aviation, expeditionary, weapons, and logistics elements, as well establish a basis to sequence program plans and estimate costs using UFAS and FASTCOST applications. This work shall build on the previous efforts used in UFAS by extending the current undersea capabilities from single to multi-domain application. These current capabilities include: detailed analysis of the impact of alternative procurement, maintenance, homeporting, Fleet readiness training plans, payload configurations, employment concepts over the near to far term, force structure decisions, Ao analysis and high level payload capacity, Operational Availability tools, forward presence, and surge employment. The framework model will capture and display platform and capability plans within the Navy’s warfighting portfolio in detail (e.g., ships, aircraft, weapons/payloads) and at the integrated force level to provide measurable metrics for a future fleet architecture (ships and aircraft) to help guide, regulate and discipline long term requirements planning and programming by leveraging techniques afready used in the shipbuilding framework, FASTCOST and UFAS, specifically the Modeling and Simulation (M&S). Work will supplement previous efforts completed by SPA, Inc. by providing more specific programs and scenario excursions, as well as considering a more complete fleet architecture. The M&S will be conducted primarily to evaluate force planning and establish seamless transitions between the legacy force and the future force to ensure the Navy remains relevant, affordable, and adaptable, ultimately supporting Naval warfighting capabilities. Using the expanded and integrated models, N8 1 and N9 will be able to assess the Navy’s future fleet architecture and effectively identi~’ systems, pathways, or platforms that will provide the most effective return on investment to complete the kill chain.

Award to a new vendor that lacks context and experience in the future fleet architecture modeling mission area, and particularly the model developed to date for these purposes, will result in significant duplication of cost and effort to the Government and would be exceptionally challenging in the time available.

~‘b) Reasons for not providing a fair oppor unity to all awardees

It is in the Government’s best interest and is most beneficial in terms of both cost and time to the Govermnent to award this sole source requirement to SPA, Inc. Making an award to any other source would result in substantial duplication of cost and effort to the Government that is not expected to be recovered through competition. Since SPA’s development of FASTCOST and UFAS, government has leveraged both models, which now need modifications to be used in an integrated framework. This updated framework model for analyzing integrated warfare trades is a critical objective in developing a future fleet architecture under current economic constraints that will further develop recommendations for a holistic Navy investment strategy. SPA, Inc. has conducted the requisite background research and data collection, and defined the operational scenario analytic assumptions, and model framework and limitations, and developed the appropriate Department of Defense Architectural Framework (DoDAF) for the shipbuilding portion of this model. The requirement is to now enhance and expand upon that work to incorporate aircraft and weapons.

Awarding to another contractor would result in significant duplication of cost and effort. SPA, Inc., with regards to both the FASTCOST and UFAS Models, have both the technical knowledge of Navy fleet architecture, cost projections, and is capable of capturing and displaying platform and capability plans within the Navy’s warfighting portfolio in detail (e.g., ships, aircraft, weapons/payloads) and at the integrated force level needed to continue to conduct this M&S. Valuable lessons learned and specialized on the job training and education acquired to date would be lost if awarded to another company.

The efforts under the proposed task order will build upon the previously discussed work. It is additionally unique in that the two models and framework analysis conducted in the past year can both provide components that will be the basis upon which work here could start, providing a more complete foundational picture than available anywhere else. Given the complexity of the topic at hand and the amount of analysis that will be needed, building upon previous efforts will be critical to flilfill the objectives of this ambitious model. Under the contracts referenced in paragraph 4 a-d above, SPA Inc. has conducted the requisite extensive background research, data collection, model building, data transition to and access of TS-SCI levels, leveraged and developed the appropriate Department of Defense Architectural Framework (DoDAF) products to support the analysis, and robustly defined the operational scenario analytic assumptions, model limitations, and model constraints. Considering the model objectives and the products created from the FASTCOST and UIFAS Models, this effort would seamlessly align as a new task order against the N81 WCM MAC, and would be conducted in time to affect Navy POM investment.

Based on the above, it has been determined that it is in the best interest of the Government to award the task order with an exception to fair opportunity based on FAR 16.505(b)(2)(i)(B).

5. DETERMINATION OF TIlE BEST VALUE: The basic contract did not establish the price for the services.

Therefore, the Fleet Logistics Center Norfolk, Contracting Department, Philadelphia Office Contracting Officer will determine, using the procedures in FAR 15.4, that the price is fair and reasonable and the order represents the best value to meet the Government’s needs.

6. DESCRIPTION OF MARKET RESEARCH: The COR for the current MAC and N9 study SME for the instant requirement conducted market research using their knowledge of the OPNAV models and prior contract vehicles. Using the above logic, market research is limited to SPA, Inc. SPA, Inc. has completed similar work in the past and is currently performing on several similar contract/actions. Market research indicates that SPA, Inc. is the most advantageous awardee to the Government, considering duplicate effort, cost, time and risk of lost technical knowledge.

7. ANY OTI{ER SUPPORTING FACTS: This procurement uses a MAC and will be solicited and awarded in accordance with FAR Subpart 16.5.

8. ACTIONS TAKEN TO REMOVE BARRIERS TO COMPETITION: As stated above, the instant requirement is related to four previous contracts under which specific analysis and modeling required were developed. FASTCOST was developed within Task Order #N00l78-05-D-4592-FKO1, which has since expired, and is now being updated and maintained via TO #N00l78-04-D-4034-EXO3. This task order was competed within Seaport-e with five (5) contractors quoting for award.

Undersea Force Analysis System (UFAS) was developed under the Navy, Director of Strategic Systems Programs (SSP), specifically contract #N00030-16-C-0019 was awarded on a sole source basis to SPA, Inc. due to their technical expertise and experience with the UFAS modeling program. SSP provided the previous J&A for review in how competition barriers have been removed for these services. After reviewing the document, the justification to award on a sole source basis is that the instant requirement will use the expertise and knowledge SPA, Inc. has gained within the previously mentioned work. The undersea architecture and framework produced for UFAS will serve as a basis for the instant requirement that involves extending this application beyond undersea into all Navy Domains, which requires the same kind of understanding and analytic expertise as used in UFAS, but extends beyond the scope of the contract under which UFAS was developed. As a result, it was learned it is the best interest of the Government to continue to utilize the body of knowledge developed by SPA, Inc. in order to take the next step. They are ideally familiar with all of the required systems to be used for the instant requirement, vice

C (7 reinventing new model and analysis programs and baselines with a new contractor. Allowing for competition for the instant requirement requires an entire baselining of technical knowledge which is time and fimding intensive.

Beyond that, the intentions, requirements and other organizational sensitivities that are program-specific are all nearly impossible to put on paper and share effectively. Additionally, the Performance Work Statement (PWS) was also reviewed to assess whether it was too restrictive for competition, and has determined that the PWS, as written, cannot be made less restrictive without compromising the Government’s highly specialized minimum needs.

Even though the most recent TO #N00l78-04-D-4034-EXO3 was competed, OPNAV N81 publishes the applicable/allowable material that is not classified either Navy or DoD-wide. In this case, the allowable information from the previous task orders, which was Navy-specific, was published. However, due to the program-sensitive nature of the material, only so much was allowed to be published which prevented the widest possible dissemination of information. The instant requirement is anticipated to be awarded under the OPNAV N8 1 World Class Modeling Support Services Multiple Award Contracts Program, which was filly competed via RFP#N00189-13-R-Z060 and resulted in five awardees.

As such, between the amount of diligent effort the Government has put forth in attempting to remove barriers to competition, combined with the minimal flexibility provided due to the sensitive nature of the instant requirement and previous task orders, awarding to SPA, Inc. on a sole source basis is the appropriate acquisition strategy.

9. CONTRACTING POINT OF CONTACT: The point of contact at Fleet Logistics Center Norfolk, Contracting Department, Philadelphia Office is Mark Damanskis; at (215) 697-9662 or by e-mail at inark.damanskis~navy.mil.

LSJ# 18-028

CERTIFICATIONS AND APPROVAL

TECHMCAL/REQUIREMENTS CERTIFICATION

I certify that the facts and representations under my cognizance which are included in this Justification and its supporting acquisition planning documents, except as noted herein, are complete and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief.

Technical Cognizance/Requirements Cognizance:

Mr. Michael Novak (703) 614-0497 4/30/2018 ‘1 Signature Name (Printed) Phone No. Date

LEGAL SUFFICIENCY REVIEW

I have determined this Justification is legal]y sufficient.

~ D~uip TURJEP J%(5-~g7-95gy ‘i-3O-i~ Signature Name (Printed) Phone No. Date

CONTRACTING OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I certify that this Justification is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief. To the extent that the J&A!LSJ value is between $150K and 5700K, the Contracting Officer’s signature below also represents approval of the J&A/LSJ.

efgrø /d4,~anc z~c~ I f Dog Signature Name (Pnnted) Phone No. Date

CONTRACTING ACTIVITY COMPETITION ADVOCATE REVIEW

To the extent that the J&AJLSJ value is between 5700K and $13.SM, the Competition Advocate’s signature below also represents approval of the J&AJLSJ.

Signature Name (Printed) Phone No. Date